SPIDER conference – 13/03/06 1 SPIDER Project Closing Conference RETHINKING REGIONS - IMPROVING REGIONAL PERFORMANCE IN THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY Brussels,

SPIDER conference – 13/03/06 1

SPIDER Project Closing Conference

RETHINKING REGIONS- IMPROVING REGIONAL

PERFORMANCE IN THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY

Brussels, March 13th 2006


What is SPIDER project?What is SPIDER project?

• SPIDER: Increasing regional competitiveness through SPIDER: Increasing regional competitiveness through futures research methodsfutures research methods is part of the Regions of is part of the Regions of Knowledge Pilot Action Programme funded by the Knowledge Pilot Action Programme funded by the European Commission.European Commission.

• The regions that form the SPIDER are South-West The regions that form the SPIDER are South-West Finland (Finland), Düsseldorf region (Germany) and Finland (Finland), Düsseldorf region (Germany) and Wallonia (Belgium).Wallonia (Belgium).

• Project is based on the co-operation of the three Project is based on the co-operation of the three organizations in above-mentioned organizations: Finland organizations in above-mentioned organizations: Finland Futures Academy (Finland Futures Research Centre), Futures Academy (Finland Futures Research Centre), Z_punkt GmbH and Institut Jules-Destree.Z_punkt GmbH and Institut Jules-Destree.


The aims of the SPIDERThe aims of the SPIDER

• The of the SPIDER project is to create The of the SPIDER project is to create connections between regional actors and connections between regional actors and reinforce their role as actors and creators of reinforce their role as actors and creators of regional knowledge-based innovation systems.regional knowledge-based innovation systems.

• Development of foresight methodologies on the Development of foresight methodologies on the basis of good practices coming from the national basis of good practices coming from the national foresight exercises and other examples.foresight exercises and other examples.

• Implement futures studies methods as a central Implement futures studies methods as a central part of regional development and innovation part of regional development and innovation systems.systems.


SPIDER : The programme of work

Local action groups

Southwest Finland

Düsseldorf Region

Wallonia

Regions

8 approaches for a knowledge region

Handbook and recommendations

Expert’s seminar

DELPHI

Regional analyses


8 approaches for a knowledge region

1. A region where all the citizens have the possibility to receive an education and to go on with life-long learning.

2. A region where we can generate and develop a permanent creative tension to build common knowledge.

3. A passionate region, a region of passion, with a real willingness to activate projects

4. A region that develops science and technology through innovation. 5. A region where sustainable connections have been developed between

creators of innovative sectors, particularly intangible assets and capital riskers (importance of micro-banking).

6. An attractive region, with a clear image, with an improving quality of life (infrastructure, environment, culture, social climate)

7. A region where regional decision-makers and citizens – especially workers and students – have a good understanding and ownership of what is a knowledge society.

8. A region promoting excellence in education and in research.


Three factors turned out to be key factors when dealing with knowledge regions in the SPIDER Delphi.

Adaptivity to Change

Innovativeness

Interaction

SPIDER Results: A bird‘s eye‘s view


A region that prepares for different possible developments in future (proactivity) and aspires for rapid actions when opportunity arrives (fast reactivity)

Southwest Finland

A region that involves and activates the interaction of the three spheres of governance: public sector, companies and civil society

Wallonia

A region that organizes the life-long learning for the citizens

A region that produces gathers and utilizes the latest knowledge in all its activities and policies

Duesseldorf Region A region whose institutions are not just capable of learning and applying new efficient practices but also capable of unlearning those old practices that have proven to be inefficient

Characteristics of knowledge regions

Innovativeness

Adaptivity

Interaction



Innovativeness

Interaction

System-centered

approach

-The system‘s adaptivity to change.-The individual‘s adaptivity to change.

Individual-centered

approach

Emphasis on measurable

hard factors and

competencies

Emphasis on “regional

wholeness”, soft factors

etc

Adaptivity to change may be seen on 2 levels

The factors roughly correspond to different perspectives on knowledge regions


The Region of Knowledge

Traditional Perspective

Emergent Perspective

Different approaches for the Region of Knowledge

SPIDER project :Regional analysisLocal action groupsDELPHI

The region of knowledge ground

Creative tension

- Social capital development oriented- Social inclusion- Feminization of values- Sustanaible developement

- Economic developement oriented-… -…


Two hypotheses based on Delphi results and Local Action Group workshops:

1.) “Problems are always outside”: Those who are ”using” traditional perspective see regional development obstacles on the level of individual performance but are putting stress on the system performance treatments. Individual-centered approach operates pretty much vice versa

2.) “The Mixing Effect”: It’s hard to separate perspectives on the operational level; Perspectives are going to mix when we are landing from definitions (pre-stage visions) to the development goals and strategies.

– Regions are “multi-headed actors” - Regional perspective includes perspectives from regional interests groups

– On the practical level this means that priority of policies and action needed is getting more complex

– There might be a great deviation between single opinions what leads to equalization of development strategies

– ”Collective future planning is a great challenge”

Two main perspectives – Two hypotheses concerning perspectives


Significance of 15 development Strategies

0

1

2

3

4

51

2

3

4

5

6

7

89

10

11

12

13

14

15

FINLAND

GERMANY

BELGIUM

The Mixing Effect in practice (importance assessment of different regional development strategies):


For all three key factors, there are specific lessons from SPIDER.


Innovativeness

Interaction

SPIDER Results: Specific Lessons Learned


Society Markets

Technology

Knowledge agents/ transmitters

Knowledge “utilizers”

Innovation should have an acceptance from markets, technology and society

Knowledge producers

A Basic Framework for the innovation system and the region of knowledge:INNOVATIVENESS -

Innovation system should be able to create and to empower valuable changes

The region of knowledge is based on knowledge producers, knowledge agents and knowledge utilizers


WE NEED MORE HOLISTIC (THE EMERGENT) PERSPECTIVE TO THE REGIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

SOME POINTS (FOR EXAMPLE):

Creative capital, Holistic approach to learning and unlearning:

-organizational

-individual

Creativeness, proactivity, adaptability: innovations are happening on the surfaces of knowledge and are innovated from problems (obstacles) or via proactive identification of new possibilities and opportunities

Regional “Know-How Clusters”

Well functional services and pleasant surroundings for people and business

Economic competitiveness, how to combine local competition and local co-operation

Institutional innovations are probably the most difficult ones

Regional partnership of actors, transfer and pairing of knowledge

Attractive place for citizens

Break ground for the strong regional identity, shared vision = common will

How to avoid “bad friction” and conflicts

INNOVATIVENESS

The region’s competitiveness is based on:

1. human capital

2. Innovativeness

3. focus4. infrastructure5. enterprises

6. Institutions

7. development networks8. quality of residential

environment9. image10.creative tension


We don’t need more networks, but different and better ones.

a. Better networks are those that create new connections across actor groups, rather than reinforce existing ones. Thus, better networks are often networks of networks (SPIDER LAG).

b. Better networks are also those that are connected to actual decision-making processes in meaningful ways (SPIDER Delphi).

c. Better networks finally are those that are systematically linked to decision-making processes. “Getting to know each other” is good, but, in the long run, it is not enough.

d. Finally, the state has to learn a new role as a “network facilitator” or “enabler” that brings a regional process of strategy-making into being (without dominating it too much).

INTERACTION


Regions should only compete where necessary. a. The success of the cluster concept has led to the unfortunate result that

every region has started to think of itself as an “xyz valley” -- often choosing the same specialization (e.g. biotech).

In order to find their niche, regions should analyze their own strenghtes. This helpfs forecome unnecessary competition (SPIDER LAG).

This is also true within regions. Subunits of regions should be complementary, rather than focussing on one and the same niche (SPIDER Delphi).

INTERACTION


Knowledge regions need new tools.

– We need to think about indicators that ‘measure’ also social and cultural aspects of regions (SPIDER Expert Seminar).

– Regions need to find marketing strategies beyond clichès (SPIDER LAG).

– No region is an island. The precise connection between regional and global interactions („global-local interplay“) needs to be studied in more depth (SPIDER Delphi).

– Foresight has a role to play here...

ADAPTIVITY


The roles of regional foresight activities are:

- to be a part of proactive decision-making or policymaking processes – BRINGER OF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES

- to produce future-oriented knowledge

- to be “a neutral networking agent” between regional actors

ADAPTIVITY


Conclusion : Challenges for Regions

• The three key factors correspond to specific challenges regions are facing. – Adaptivity --> Develop new tools! But which

ones?– Innovativeness --> How to inspire

innovations?– Interaction --> Networking - but how and for

what purpose?

• These questions will be jointly discussed in the afternoon sessions.


Spider handbook with more detailedresults and conclusions will be finished by the end of March!


Comments and ideas • Why do the networks exist?

– Networking has been seen a solution of all problems; a lot of forced networks instead of spontaneous

• New era of critical approach towards networks

• Two types of networks– One goal networks– Open-ended networks

• Networks as business– more valuable to some members of the network than

some others


Comments and ideas • Network benefits: collective added value,

subjective (private) added value

• Decision-making: a common core that keeps network working vs. individual tasks

• Common language and communication must be created in order to gain trust

Documents

SPIDER conference – 13/03/06 1 SPIDER Project Closing Conference RETHINKING REGIONS - IMPROVING REGIONAL PERFORMANCE IN THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY Brussels,